Influence of a latent period in QALY anaylsis: Pilot study of intrathecal drug delivery systems for chronic non-malignant pain

被引:13
作者
Biggs, Simon A. [2 ]
Duarte, Rui V. [1 ,2 ]
Raphael, Jon H. [1 ,2 ]
Ashford, Robert L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Birmingham City Univ, Fac Hlth, Birmingham B15 3TN, W Midlands, England
[2] Dudley Grp Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Pain Management Dept, Dudley, England
关键词
Chronic non-malignant pain; cost effectiveness; intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS); latent period; QALY analysis; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; MORPHINE; THERAPY; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.3109/02688697.2010.551676
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Cost effectiveness of a treatment is an important factor in decision making in the United Kingdom. Preceding most interventional health care treatments there is a waiting period between decision and procedure where health care costs may be lessened. Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS) are a recognised pain management therapy for chronic non-malignant pain. To our knowledge, the period of time between being placed on a waiting list for IDDS and the implant (latent period) has not been taken into consideration for cost effectiveness analysis. A retrospective longitudinal analysis of all pain related costs for a period no less than 4 years was undertaken by assessment of medical records of 12 consecutive patients implanted with IDDS for chronic non-malignant pain. The total cost of patient care for 2 years before latent, the latent period itself and 2 years after the implant of an IDDS was computed, according to the National Health Service tariff. An EQ-5D questionnaire was filled by all participants before and after IDDS implant. Total costs were converted to cost per day for comparison with latent period. The average duration of the latent period was 263 +/- 176 days (range 3-489). The cost of conventional treatments during the pre-implant phase excluding the latent period was significantly higher (M = 5,005.86 pound, SE = 918.56) pound compared with the costs of the same phase including the latent period (M = 4,086.35 pound, SE = 959.09 pound, t(11) = 2.23, p = 0.05, r = 0.56). The cost per day changed significantly over the different periods (chi(2) (2) = 24.00, p<0.05). The variability and significantly lower costs of the latent period may influence cost effectiveness evaluations and consequently decision making, if not considered. Further studies analysing the influence of a latent period on the cost effectiveness of other treatments are warranted.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 406
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   A prospective study of long-term intrathecal morphine in the management of chronic nonmalignant pain [J].
Anderson, VC ;
Burchiel, KJ .
NEUROSURGERY, 1999, 44 (02) :289-300
[2]  
[Anonymous], BRIT NAT FORM
[3]   Intrathecal pumps [J].
Belverud, Shawn ;
Mogilner, Alon ;
Schulder, Michael .
NEUROTHERAPEUTICS, 2008, 5 (01) :114-122
[4]   Intrathecal therapy for cancer and nonmalignant pain:: Patient selection and patient management [J].
Deer, T ;
Winkelmüller, W ;
Erdine, S ;
Bedder, M ;
Burchiel, K .
NEUROMODULATION, 1999, 2 (02) :55-66
[5]   Cost-effectiveness of long-term intrathecal morphine therapy for pain associated with failed back surgery syndrome [J].
deLissovoy, G ;
Brown, RE ;
Halpern, M ;
Hassenbusch, SJ ;
Ross, E .
CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 1997, 19 (01) :96-112
[6]   CLINICAL ECONOMICS - A GUIDE TO THE ECONOMIC-ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL PRACTICES [J].
EISENBERG, JM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1989, 262 (20) :2879-2886
[7]  
Hassenbusch S J, 1997, J Pain Symptom Manage, V14, pS36, DOI 10.1016/S0885-3924(97)00169-3
[8]   Components of placebo effect: randomised controlled trial inpatients with irritable bowel syndrome [J].
Kaptchuk, Ted J. ;
Kelley, John M. ;
Conboy, Lisa A. ;
Davis, Roger B. ;
Kerr, Catherine E. ;
Jacobson, Eric E. ;
Kirsch, Irving ;
Schyner, Rosa N. ;
Nam, Bong Hyun ;
Nguyen, Long T. ;
Park, Min ;
Rivers, Andrea L. ;
McManus, Claire ;
Kokkotou, Efi ;
Drossman, Douglas A. ;
Goldman, Peter ;
Lembo, Anthony J. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2008, 336 (7651) :999-1003
[9]   Treatment of chronic pain by using intrathecal drug therapy compared with conventional pain therapies: a cost-effectiveness analysis [J].
Kumar, K ;
Hunter, G ;
Demeria, DD .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2002, 97 (04) :803-810
[10]   Continuous intrathecal morphine treatment for chronic pain of nonmalignant etiology: Long-term benefits and efficacy [J].
Kumar, K ;
Kelly, M ;
Pirlot, T .
SURGICAL NEUROLOGY, 2001, 55 (02) :79-86